Police Force Should Be Able To Police Itself

June 18, 1992|By TOM CONDON; Courant Columnist

A woman called me last week to say she was mad at the cops.

It seems her 19-year-old son had gotten into trouble, and may have been armed. The cops thought the boy had scrammed to the mother's home. When she answered the door, she saw five cops with guns drawn.

She said the sight of the guns scared the heck out of her. I'm sure it did. Even though an officer later called to apologize, she said, the cops had no right to frighten her like that.

If the city had a powerful police civilian review board, as some city officials want, here's what might happen: The woman would file a complaint. The board might agree that the cops were out of line -- although I can't see how they were -- and discipline them.

The next time these officers had to chase a bad guy with a gun, they wouldn't. They'd go for coffee.

The proposed civilian review board is a bad idea.

It would create a seven-member board with five members appointed by the mayor. An independent investigator would be appointed, and the board would have access to all police records.

First, why single out the cops? Teachers, for example, have much more potential to harm youngsters than the cops do. Why isn't there a teacher review board?

Secondly, a board with its own political agenda would probably make things worse. If board members started second-guessing everything the cops did, the cops would stop doing anything. If officers who take risks and make occassional mistakes were punished, they'd stop taking risks.

The only thing that could justify a powerful review board would be the department's failure to properly review the performance of its officers.

But recent events indicate that the department is doing its job.

Two weeks ago, it arrested an officer, Sergio Inho, on charges of using excessive force while answering a call. The warrant application says Inho hit a man with his gun barrel, putting him on the ground, then kicked him so hard he broke the man's jaw on both sides.

A few weeks before that, Officer Ezequiel Laureano was fired for striking a University of Hartford student during a

beer-blast-turned-riot at the school in 1991. That incident wasn't well handled, but it was handled. It took way too long. The line officer was disciplined before the supervisors who put him in the situation were. But, several sources say, departmental charges have been lodged against the sergeant and lieutenant on the scene.

I have my differences with the lightweights who run the police union, and with the small number of officers who think cops can use all the force they want.

But the vast majority of Hartford officers act as professionals and should be treated as professionals. If a second level of performance review is necessary, it ought to be a peer review process.

The cops should do what the lawyers do. If someone files a complaint against a lawyer, it is examined by a grievance committee of lawyers from another part of the state. The police should have the same kind of arrangement. Peer review works. If, as some defense lawyers charge, there are certain cops who consistently use too much force, peer review is the way to weed them out.

This is not to say that the police shouldn't have input from the community. Quite the contrary. But that input should come as part of a community policing plan, in which the cops and residents work together to solve problems. Hartford has made a start with this, and it should be increased. If the cops and the people worked together more often, we wouldn't be talking about a civilian review board